scott richard scott, you're very welcome. several american officials, including as we just heard there a divide to crane support, a republican congressman of the hardest. they're coming out, they're calling the conflict. no, essentially on winnable for t is what this the change and rhetoric signal to well, it's that goes uh, finally uh, the west is accepting reality. uh, ukraine was never going to win this war. the best ukraine could have hoped for was a stalemate, or a slow rolling defeat, where they inflicted enough harm on russia to cause russia to politically withdraw its infuse the as and for continuing this conflict. but the opposite is occurred, the ukraine is suffering horrific casualties. unsustainable casualties, not only in terms of manpower, which is to be honest, sickening. but the, the equipment nato has stripped its arsenals. uh, you know, to the, to the, the beer uh, the bottom of the barrel to gives you crane tanks armored fighting vehicles artillery fan munitions. they don't have enough ammunition and it's not been enough . cranes. counter offensive is failing. they've just committed their strategic reserves. there's nothing left after this, and the strategic reserves are going to beat their heads against the brick wall. that is, the russian defense is they will be defeated. and when that happens, the momentum will transfer to russia. it already has in places like beyond rushes, turned out a very successful offense of operation. and one can anticipate that once the training and strategic strategic preserves are depleted rusher will be able to assume that offensive past year across the light. this is the last thing, nato and the west want because it not only creates the image of a russian victory, but the reality of a russian victory it puts you create an even more dire circumstance. um, and so the west is recognizing this and, but now they have the problem. how do you politically accept this reality? when you have said that a russian victory as a strategic defeat for nato, for the united states, and that's just for ukraine. so there's some political maneuvering that has to take place to, uh, to, you know, basically translate this, this uh, i opening awareness into, uh, you know, some sort of policy on the ground that can be implemented. if that's the point i actually wanted to raise, because nato secretary general said the block would support ukraine quote, until the end, we've heard that repeatedly, but as more and more in this case, us officials start to fall off the key of bandwagon some what. how does that start going to affect relations going forward between nato alex? well, 1st of all, i understand the, the circumstances in which the young stone bird made that statement. there was, after his deputy said that maybe it's time for ukraine to consider the territorial concessions to russia. that is, given russia in the territory that it currently occupies in exchange for nato membership for getting for a moment. i guess that the entire reason this conflict is being fought is because russia refuses to allow ukraine to become a data nation. but be that as it may, we, we see right there, a major departure a by the, the deputy head of a nato talking about territorial concessions. this is, you know, an outgrowth of what happened in just a saudi arabia where there's a wednesday government put down there 10 points that require for peace. none of which are realistic in the west responded saying you're going to have to start making concessions. this is, the reality of this war is not sustainable in europe is already saying we don't have anything left to give you. oh yeah, there's a few f, 16 fighters, they can get out there. they have a survive ability factor of 0 of the the, the bottom line is united states is unwilling to continue to foot. the bill in europe is unwilling to continue to provide the resources you're trained is going to have to eventually accept reality and negotiate terms of conflict, termination that are were aligned with what rush it wants to know what they want. right. a talking of the bill, you know, it's, it is worth mentioning that you know, the, the billions in weapons packages it and in, including recently as well, lots gone up. why hasn't that had the impact that key of and the west believes that they would have or, or maybe they didn't, but kid wanted coming in any way on the front line, a look from the training perspective and here is a military professional. i have some sympathy, you know, when this conflict started they had a very highly trained military, a native which spent from 2015 until 2022. you know, training of 500 men every 55 days to nato standards. and uh, what, what your train said is, give us the equipment we need now give it to us upfront, give us the equipment that these well trained troops can use. uh, but that didn't happen. and what we saw is that the ukraine army was depleted of manpower. it was rebuilt by nato depleted rebuild depleted. you can only rebuild so many times before. the quality of the manpower is so diminished that it doesn't matter what the quality of the equipment is. we're at that point right now where it doesn't matter what weapon re ukraine receives their army is no longer capable of absorbing this equipment and using this equipment effectively on a modern field of battle. meanwhile, russia has troops that are extraordinary, well trained, extraordinary, well, lead, extraordinarily well equipped the out class, the training in military, in every way, shape and form. you can't reverse this a trajectory. russia is on a trajectory of inevitable victory, and there's nothing the west to do to change this. and that's the reality. the people are suddenly coming to, it doesn't matter about how many more tanks you gave, what kind of tanks you give ukrainian soldier right now is incapable of receiving these tags and using these tags effectively on a modern battlefield. scott, much appreciate your take on your time. as always, scott ritter, former us marine corps intelligence officer, live on the program. thanks not to forget you've done this president has last thoughts of the world banks decision to cut all find. busy related to the country following recent of the l g. b t legislation. seeing the west is trying to intimidate his nation. some of these imperialist actors are insufferable. you have to work hard to restrain yourself from exploding with anger . there so shallow. they do not know when and where to stop the world banks cut funding to your guns and infrastructure projects, further provoking, financial hardship in the east african country. as a consequence, kampala was obliged to revise its budget to account for the loss of financing, resulting in the biggest currency, the evaluation in almost 8 years. the world bank said the move was in order to prevent discrimination in projects. it funds. however, according to a, you've done an active as such r